Hi John, I am trying to remember the history of why that code is there, and the reason escapes me right now.
Pat Marion: Do you remember this? I propose that we remove it from the plugin until a time that we can sync with your latest work. Does that sound reasonable? On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 5:03 AM, Biddiscombe, John A. <[email protected]> wrote: > Casey > > > > I had a look at the PCL plugin and couldn’t help notice that you’ve copied > some of my particle partition filtering code into the plugin, though it > does not look functional as it’s not enabled in the cmake and does not > include the relevant Zoltan sources or the vtkZoltanV1PartitionFilter base > class. > > > > The partitioning (both particle and mesh) have been refactored (from the > pv-meshles plugin) into their own self contained plugin for some time now > and it would be cleaner in my view to have an option in the PCL plugin to > enable parallel partitioning and use the pv-zoltan plugin as a submodule > where necessary > > https://github.com/biddisco/pv-zoltan > > > > (I tend to use GitExternal and SubProject cmake modules rather than a git > submodule, I can send links if you’re interested). > > > > The pv-zoltan code is currently under development (and is working with > pv-4.4/master) to improve it as part of a GSOC project and should soon be > compatible with zoltan2 rather than Zoltan. I can make sure a > pv-4.4+zoltan1 compatible branch remains functional should we make major > changes. > > > > I might even volunteer to do the clean integration of pv-zoltan with the > pcl plugin should you be in need of volunteers. > > > > JB > > > > > > *From:* ParaView [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Casey > Goodlett > *Sent:* 13 July 2015 21:16 > *To:* Eric Younkin - NOAA Federal > *Cc:* paraview > *Subject:* Re: [Paraview] PCL Plugin > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 1:32 PM, Eric Younkin - NOAA Federal < > [email protected]> wrote: > > Casey, > > > > I don't mean to take up so much of your time, but I've been reviewing the > cmake configuration and I found that there were a number of HDF5 tests that > failed (see below). Is that significant? > > > > > > I do not think this is a problem. > > > > Also, one of the errors I saw upon rebuilding: > > > > *error C1041: cannot open program database > 'c:\users\eric.g.younkin\documents\pcl_paraview\paraview-v4.3.1-source\build\plugins\sciberquesttoolkit\paraviewplugin\sciberquesttoolkit.dir\debug\vc120.pdb'; > if multiple CL.EXE write to the same .PDB file, please use /FS > C:\Users\eric.g.younkin\Documents\PCL_ParaView\ParaView-v4.3.1-source\build\Plugins\SciberQuestToolKit\ParaViewPlugin\moc_pqSQFieldTracerImplementation.cpp)* > > > > Led me to the moc_pqSQFieldTracerImplementation.cpp which had a comment at > the top stating > > > > *"This file was generated using the moc from 5.5.0. It cannot be used with > the include files from this version of Qt. (The moc has changed too much.)"* > > > > So I will try with Qt5.4.1 instead. > > > > > > I am not familiar with this problem. Maybe the filename is getting too > long for windows? Maybe another developer can help with the Qt issues, I > am not an expert in this area. > > > > Regards, > > > > -- > > Casey B Goodlett, PhD > Technical Leader > Kitware, Inc. - North Carolina Office > http://www.kitware.com > (919) 969-6990 x310 > -- Casey B Goodlett, PhD Technical Leader Kitware, Inc. - North Carolina Office http://www.kitware.com (919) 969-6990 x310
_______________________________________________ Powered by www.kitware.com Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Please keep messages on-topic and check the ParaView Wiki at: http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView Search the list archives at: http://markmail.org/search/?q=ParaView Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/paraview
